Political Correctness and Halloween Costumes

[Thaluikhain]

People need to grow up and stop expecting the world to suit them and them alone.

Ah huh. And, of course, those people aren't the ones perpetuating harmful stereotypes because they think it's funny, it's the ones being affected by it who think the world exists solely for them.

 

[Ickorus]

People need to grow up and stop expecting the world to suit them and them alone.

Ah huh. And, of course, those people aren't the ones perpetuating harmful stereotypes because they think it's funny, it's the ones being affected by it who think the world exists solely for them.

Yes.

Different people have different opinions on what is offensive and what is not, the vast majority of us just deal with it when something offends us, perhaps we'll have a disparaging remark for it but we'll move on and probably not give it much thought beyond that.

Just because your feelings are hurt doesn't mean the rest of society has to stop doing whatever it is that offended you and to expect otherwise is incredibly self-absorbed and about as silly as expecting a brick wall to get out of your path.

I mean, in the end, if we all stopped doing things that offended others nobody would be doing anything and that lack of doing anything would probably still be offensive to someone.

Mental illness has much bigger fish to fry than a silly Halloween costume that may or may not hurt a couple of oversensitive people's feelings.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Yes.

Different people have different opinions on what is offensive and what is not, the vast majority of us just deal with it when something offends us, perhaps we'll have a disparaging remark for it but we'll move on and probably not give it much thought beyond that.

Just because your feelings are hurt doesn't mean the rest of society has to stop doing whatever it is that offended you and to expect otherwise is incredibly self-absorbed and about as silly as expecting a brick wall to get out of your path.

I mean, in the end, if we all stopped doing things that offended others nobody would be doing anything and that lack of doing anything would probably still be offensive to someone.

Mental illness has much bigger fish to fry than a silly Halloween costume that may or may not hurt a couple of oversensitive people's feelings.

Firstly, while it is true that there are worse problems facing the mentally ill, it doesn't mean that lesser ones didn't matter.

Secondly, this isn't simply a matter of offending people, the mentally ill face severe stigmas, and stuff like this is not helping. For example, there have been recent calls in the US by politicians for mentally ill people to be registered, in the belief that they are a violent threat to wider society. That is a very serious problem.

Third, who said society "had" to be more tolerant of the mentally ill? People complained, companies decided to apologise and remove the items.

 

[Silvanus]

Obviously the costume in that picture isn't supposed to represent your typical mental patient any more than this is supposed to represent your average doctor.

Doctors do not face debilitating stigma in everyday life. That is the entire point this is controversial, and doctor costumes aren't.

It's like me complaining that The IT Crowd portrays IT Technician as an 'offensive' caricature and me demanding the show be removed from TV to spare my and other IT Technician's feelings and to prevent any negative stereotypes of us from forming.

People need to grow up and stop expecting the world to suit them and them alone.

IT Technicians do not face debilitaring stigma in everyday life.

And as for people needing to stop "expecting the world to suit them and them alone"-- are you being serious? When was the last time anything suited the mentally ill "and them alone"? Have you ever been outside? All that is asked, by charities who speak on their behalf, is a modicum of respect-- not even that, but simply not to be actively singled out with ridicule. It's a reasonable ask.

These people can suffer neverending stigma and sometimes frequent abuse. The only scenario in which you could see it that way is one in which you don't realise how much the world suits you more than others.

 

[Coruptin]

honestly, at first i was going tell you how wrong you are, but now i just feel bad for you. i'd suggest ignoring this thread from now on james, if you aren't already. there's no need to purposefully agitate yourself.

 

[Ickorus]

Obviously the costume in that picture isn't supposed to represent your typical mental patient any more than this is supposed to represent your average doctor.

Doctors do not face debilitating stigma in everyday life. That is the entire point this is controversial, and doctor costumes aren't.

It's like me complaining that The IT Crowd portrays IT Technician as an 'offensive' caricature and me demanding the show be removed from TV to spare my and other IT Technician's feelings and to prevent any negative stereotypes of us from forming.

People need to grow up and stop expecting the world to suit them and them alone.

IT Technicians do not face debilitaring stigma in everyday life.

And as for people needing to stop "expecting the world to suit them and them alone"-- are you being serious? When was the last time anything suited the mentally ill "and them alone"? Have you ever been outside? All that is asked, by charities who speak on their behalf, is a modicum of respect-- not even that, but simply not to be actively singled out with ridicule. It's a reasonable ask.

These people can suffer neverending stigma and sometimes frequent abuse. The only scenario in which you could see it that way is one in which you don't realise how much the world suits you more than others.

'People' not 'the mentally ill'.

If you read the article, most of the people who have a problem with it aren't actually mentally ill, they're people who are offended on behalf of the mentally ill, who are 'defending' the mentally ill, I'm arguing with these people that expecting society to somehow be completely inoffensive to everyone is impossible.

In case it isn't clear enough yet, I don't think these people are actually representing the interests of the mentally ill, they seem to think they exist in a state of perpetual victimhood and that they need to be told what they find offensive, I have actually seen very few people with actual mental illness weigh in on the subject.

I actually just had a quick look about on other news sites with comment sections and it looks like the vast majority of people claiming it is offensive don't suffer from a mental illness and people who claim to have a mental illness* are fairly evenly split between being offended and not being offended, probably with a slight slant on 'not offended'.

[small]* People lie on the internet so this last part should be taken with a grain of salt.[/small]

 

[Silvanus]

'People' not 'the mentally ill'.

If you read the article, most of the people who have a problem with it aren't actually mentally ill, they're people who are offended on behalf of the mentally ill, who are 'defending' the mentally ill, I'm arguing with these people that expecting society to somehow be completely inoffensive to everyone is impossible.

In case it isn't clear enough yet, I don't think these people are actually representing the interests of the mentally ill, they seem to think they exist in a state of perpetual victimhood and that they need to be told what they find offensive, I have actually seen very few people with actual mental illness weigh in on the subject.

I actually just had a quick look about on other news sites with comment sections and it looks like the vast majority of people claiming it is offensive don't suffer from a mental illness and people who claim to have a mental illness* are fairly evenly split between being offended and not being offended, probably with a slight slant on 'not offended'.

[small]* People lie on the internet so this last part should be taken with a grain of salt.[/small]

That's a fair point, but I'd still argue that charity workers who professionally work with the mentally ill probably have a better grasp of how to sensitively approach the subject than us.

 

[ForumSafari]

IT Technicians do not face debilitaring stigma in everyday life.

It's almost like you don't work in IT at all. Jokes aside the IT department of any company does actually get a fair amount of stick they're not due, that's why System Administrator Appreciation Day exists.

 

[AwesomeHatMan]

(Sorry my first post on a thread so I'm not sure on rules and protocols for writing this sorta stuff)
First of all let's all calm down. Both sides clearly are emotional about this and that's okay but we need to remember that it is important to imagine how the other side feels. Let's get one thing straight from the start you are absolutely right that mental patients are nothing like what the costume depicts. If anyone thinks that they can generalise all mental patients as the deranged psychopaths stereotype the are ignorant. However, if you ask anyone who wanted to wear that costume whether they were trying to dress as an accurate depiction of a mental patient or a crazed-murderer trope from classic horror movies they will always answer the latter.
Hallowe'en is about dressing up as something scary or silly and having fun. From what I have gathered you didn't have a problem with the costume, just the labeling. So let's think about what labeling they should have used. I, personally, believe deranged psychopath is the best way to describe what the costume shows. But, the name of the costume should be the first thing people use to try and find their costume online. The most significant part of this costume is the straitjacket and customers may specifically want a costume with a straitjacket. Now, keeping in mind people are looking up a scary Hallowe'en costume, when looking up a costume with a straitjacket and trying to describe the costume the first thing many people would search is "mental patient Hallowe'en costume". The customers wouldn't sit there trying to think of the best way to describe the costume they want but rather the first way they think of describing it, so that's what a company called the costume. The reason why it's not "Murderous Mental Patient" and why it's a given is because it's a Hallowe'en costume and they want to dress up as a character from a horror movie not a real-life person with a depressing disease... also they were probably trying to make the name as simple and quick as possible
The nurse example actually was very reasonable. You yourself are trivialising sexism and unreasonable behaviour towards nurses. You should not straight out say that his point about nurses is silly, how would you feel if someone said that your argument about mental patients is silly. By the looks of things quite upset.
If a "sexy nurse" costume was instead just called "nurse" some nurses could be offended. This is because the costume implies that all nurses are promiscuous. This isn't true, we know it's not true and the people wearing the costume know it's not true. However, if a nurse were offended a typical response would be "Look, it's just a costume, we know not all nurses are promiscuous the costume's not meant to be what nurses actually look like, it's meant to be a slutty nurse a particular character that is not representative of the whole. No-one thinks that nurses are all sluts. If you know we're not trying to be offensive and you know the costume isn't meant to represent a real nurse why are you getting offended?"
This is quite similar to how people feel about the mental patients. Your problem that the costume promotes a stereotype is met with a response saying we know this character doesn't represent the whole group so stop trying to teach us that and stopping us having fun. If your problem is that you don't think people know that mental patients are not all slasher villains then either you are wrong or people where you are from are a lot more ignorant or quite frankly just stupid. If your problem is you think people shouldn't be allowed to dress up as these characters then I fail to see the relevance of the mental patient name. If it is, as I believe, solely about the name as I earlier said it's not what the costume actual is but what people would type into Google.

 

[Callate]

Honestly, I'm a bit torn.

I think the OP has a point, and I certainly sympathize with his situation. I don't know that I agree that a violent mentally ill person is less dangerous or threatening than your average street tough (if nothing else, I have some sense that I could reason with such a person, or give them my wallet, or that they would back down if law enforcement made an appearance), but I also recognize that a violently mentally ill person wandering the streets unrecognized and untreated is far more likely to be dangerous than the one who has actually been admitted to a hospital and undergone treatment- that is, not the sort of person who might be wearing a straight jacket.

And is there a lot of ignorance in the view of the mentally ill? Absolutely.

But on the other hand, the "dangerous psychotic" remains an incredibly popular source for scary villains in books, movies, and television, and I don't think it's going away any time soon. And I wonder how much redesign would be necessary before the OP would find the costume inoffensive- a name change? Losing the straight jacket?

Halloween is one night a year, and arguably it's a time when it's societally acceptable to purge our fears- including ones that we quite frankly recognize as irrational. I'm less and less confident that we actually address or diminish stereotypes by simply saying "don't present person type 'x' this way"; sometimes, it seems like we just polarize people further, causing some to become more antagonistic and giving others an excuse to demonize and dismiss anyone who feels that way.

In short, yes, I'd like to see more public education about mental illness, and I'd be willing to see changes made in such a costume to make it less offensive to those offended, but I wouldn't simply have it go away; I'm not sure it would be beneficial.

 

[Thaluikhain]

IT Technicians do not face debilitaring stigma in everyday life.

It's almost like you don't work in IT at all. Jokes aside the IT department of any company does actually get a fair amount of stick they're not due, that's why System Administrator Appreciation Day exists.

Do people call for them to be locked up, because they say they are a violent threat to everyone else in society? Cause if not, I don't think that's a good comparison.

EDIT: Wait...did I just seriously have to say that the mentally ill are more stigmatised than people that work in IT?

 

[ForumSafari]

IT Technicians do not face debilitaring stigma in everyday life.

It's almost like you don't work in IT at all. Jokes aside the IT department of any company does actually get a fair amount of stick they're not due, that's why System Administrator Appreciation Day exists.

Do people call for them to be locked up, because they say they are a violent threat to everyone else in society? Cause if not, I don't think that's a good comparison.

EDIT: Wait...did I just seriously have to say that the mentally ill are more stigmatised than people that work in IT?

No you did not but gosh darn it you just couldn't help it could you?

Do you see the word 'joke' above? That indicates the not-seriousness of the post. It was a flippant remark, are you really so bereft of contextual awareness that you couldn't understand that?

 

[Ihateregistering1]

This is why I love The Escapist: I always discover new things people are offended and upset about that I had no idea were considered an issue or even existed. It's like discovering some lost, ancient tribe of extraordinarily sensitive people deep in the heart of the Amazon.

 

[TallanKhan]

I don't think the costume was the problem. I think it was actually the name. Had they called it "merderous psychopath" I don't think people would have batted an eyelid. Ironically they were probably trying to be PC by not using a term like "psycho".

 

[ninjaRiv]

Yeah, this is CRAZY lol... I mean, why would be be sick of being stereotyped and treated poorly?

People are sensitive about it, yes. But they have the right to be. How many people's mental illness is undiagnosed because they're scared of the way people will view or treat them? A lot, if you... Didn't know the answer already.

It's a pretty big slap in the face to make a person's mental illness, something he/she barely survives a day because of, into a ridiculous stereotype that encourages to treat people badly. Despite what people think, mental illness is still a pretty huge negative thing for society. Nobody wants to talk about it and if it's around, they don't want to associate with it.

 

[Silvanus]

I've been thinking about this quite a lot today, for some strange unfathomable reason.


Specifically, I was imagining a halloween costume based on Renfield, from Dracula. He's a mental patient; he wears a straight-jacket; he's crazy and creepy and dangerous.

I'm pretty sure that costume would be absolutely fine-- it's specifically a character of fiction, and by making that obvious, it would imply nothing about the community as a whole.

And yet, a simple re-name of the costume above wouldn't sit right with me; were that figure called a "murderous psychopath", an implication about the mentally ill would still be obvious. He's wearing a damn straight-jacket.

 

[Scarecrow]

Mental patients get such an awful deal in video games and the entertainment industry as it is, the name on this one is not wise at all. A renaming would have being best.

 

[Pink Gregory]

You get a backlash wherever being considerate to other people is concerned in the UK. Some people have an odd idea of 'Good Clean Fun', until, of course, it's at their own expense.

Mainly it's the Daily Mail and their ilk trying to hide their disappointment at the fact that it's simply not acceptable to refer to every black person as '******' or 'sambo' or homosexuals and 'wrong'uns' or whatever.

But yeah, in this case, it's a case of rather senseless titling.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

I?m fine with the costume, since it looks like your typical horror film villain, but they shouldn?t have called it something so on-the-nose offensive as ?Mental Patient?. They should?ve called it something like ?Psycho Killer?, like Bertylicious suggested, or ?Zombie Butcher?. I doubt it was malicious intent, but it sure was ignorant.

This isn?t ?PC gone mad?. Most people that complain about ?PC? are just people who, for some odd reason, want to hold onto their ?right? to be a twat to someone and not face any criticism for it.

Is the issue the NAMING of the costume (i.e. "mental patient") or the SUBJECT of mental patients? Because if it's the subject, we should immediately ban Michael Myers and Jason X costumes, since they're disparaging to the offspring of broken families and such. And Freddy Kruger costumes are disrespectful of burn victims. Not all of them haunt your dreams, you know?

It's purely the name, since it has the unfortunate implication that all mental patients are all ugly, straitjacketed murderers. Michael Myers, Jason X, Freddy Kruger, and even the Joker (in fact, especially the Joker) are exaggerated fictional characters, and costumes based on them would be named as such.

 

[Remus]

What we need is a big white badge on every costume this halloween that reads "NOTE: Costume is not representative of (insert trope here). Any similarity between the costume and real people is purely coincidental". You are only offended by the costume because you have a personal stake in the matter. You know a mental patient so are likely offended by every portrayal of mental patients in every form of media. I bet American Horror Story: Asylum just drove you up the wall. Did you send an angry letter to them? I bet you did.

Almost nobody takes offense to anything so trivial as a halloween costume unless they either are what's being presented or knows somebody. Dick Cheney didn't say a word about gay rights until his daughter came out, after his term was up and he could no longer affect change. I'm not comparing gays to mental patients, just showing a clear example of a similar pattern. Everybody knows somebody that's facing a kind of hardship that might be misrepresented in some form of media. Just let it roll off your back and move on.

Besides, it's not the mental patients we have to worry about. They know they have a problem and submitted to treatment and are therefore safe. It's the people that aren't being treated that are a problem. The people like Jared Lee Loughner who shot Gabby Giffords in the head in front of a crowd of people, then proceeded to fire on the crowd. He was later diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic. Or more recently, Aaron Alexis, the naval yard shooter, who thought his body was being penetrated by microwaves beamed to him by the government. So in response, he killed 13 people and was later gunned down by police. These are just two examples. I can easily provide others as we see a new one at least once every couple of weeks. They may be the exception but they are far from being so miniscule as to not count. My suggestion: Get over it, or better yet, wear a costume that you find equally offensive in response. I bet nobody would notice that either.